Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral traits. It discloses the account-scoped access ('on YOUR account'), filtering capability, and pagination. However, it does not state that the operation is read-only (safe), describe result ordering, or mention any side effects. Lacks explicit read-only hint, but the behavior is mostly implied.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences with zero waste. The first sentence delivers the core purpose immediately; the second packs optional filtering and pagination into a single concise clause. No redundant or filler content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema, the description adequately covers account scope, optional filter, and pagination. It also points to a sibling tool for status code reference. Missing details like result ordering or field list, but for a paginated list tool with 3 simple parameters, this is reasonably complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds value by stating 'on YOUR account' (scoping results), referencing 'get_order_statuses' for valid status codes, and labeling the tool as paginated. This enriches understanding beyond the schema alone.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'List orders on YOUR account' – a specific verb (list) and resource (orders), with explicit scoping to the authenticated user's account. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_order' (single order), 'create_order', 'cancel_order', etc.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description mentions an optional numeric status filter and references 'get_order_statuses' for valid codes, hinting at when to apply filtering. It also notes pagination, implying large result sets. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives (e.g., use get_order for a single order), nor does it provide negative guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.